<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Gay is NOT the New Black</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/gay-is-not-the-new-black/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/gay-is-not-the-new-black/</link>
	<description>An online community sharing our lives and faith within a place of grace</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Dec 2011 05:29:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/gay-is-not-the-new-black/comment-page-1/#comment-34323</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Apr 2011 19:38:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/?p=1295#comment-34323</guid>
		<description>Nobody should ever compare the Civil Rights Movement to the Gay Rights Movement.  Yes, they have a lot of similarities, but I feel as if no other minority group will ever undestand the pain that african americans have gone through. Being gay, or out-spoken about being gay is a choice, but being black is not a choice. Nobody is ever forced to be gay, but for blacks, we have no say in our skin color.  It is something we have to deal with, without much of a choice.  Gays can hide who they are so that they can prevent beinv harrassed, while blacks can nof hide fhe facr that they have brown skin.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nobody should ever compare the Civil Rights Movement to the Gay Rights Movement.  Yes, they have a lot of similarities, but I feel as if no other minority group will ever undestand the pain that african americans have gone through. Being gay, or out-spoken about being gay is a choice, but being black is not a choice. Nobody is ever forced to be gay, but for blacks, we have no say in our skin color.  It is something we have to deal with, without much of a choice.  Gays can hide who they are so that they can prevent beinv harrassed, while blacks can nof hide fhe facr that they have brown skin.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: anita</title>
		<link>http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/gay-is-not-the-new-black/comment-page-1/#comment-3900</link>
		<dc:creator>anita</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:45:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/?p=1295#comment-3900</guid>
		<description>Laura--&gt;So appreciate all you&#039;ve added to this topic!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Laura&#8211;>So appreciate all you&#8217;ve added to this topic!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laura H.</title>
		<link>http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/gay-is-not-the-new-black/comment-page-1/#comment-3875</link>
		<dc:creator>Laura H.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Dec 2008 14:27:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/?p=1295#comment-3875</guid>
		<description>Anita: Thanks for your response. I do agree that a &quot;?&quot; on the end of the statement would have been more appropriate, and also, I believe, still grabbed readers attention. As it is, I hope you are correct (and based on the dialog here, it certainly seems so!) that it is engaging lots of folks in meaningful dialog so we can keep moving, however slowly, forward.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anita: Thanks for your response. I do agree that a &#8220;?&#8221; on the end of the statement would have been more appropriate, and also, I believe, still grabbed readers attention. As it is, I hope you are correct (and based on the dialog here, it certainly seems so!) that it is engaging lots of folks in meaningful dialog so we can keep moving, however slowly, forward.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: anita</title>
		<link>http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/gay-is-not-the-new-black/comment-page-1/#comment-3869</link>
		<dc:creator>anita</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 23:56:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/?p=1295#comment-3869</guid>
		<description>Laura--&gt; I appreciated all you said here and hope folks take the time to read through your contribution. Just to be clear, I most definitely read the Advocate article and agreed with much of what was said in it. Despite the intention of drawing interest and readership with the cover (after all, the Advocate is a for-profit company) I still seriously question the appropriateness of the cover. I would have probably felt much more comfortable with the question &quot;Is Gay the New Black?&quot; which would have left the statement open, rather than the declaration statement &quot;Gay is the New Black&quot; which suggests a closed one. Either way, if it&#039;s engaging people in conversations about racism and homophobia, the civil rights movement, the gay rights movement, and equality in general, then it would seem to be a win.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Laura&#8211;> I appreciated all you said here and hope folks take the time to read through your contribution. Just to be clear, I most definitely read the Advocate article and agreed with much of what was said in it. Despite the intention of drawing interest and readership with the cover (after all, the Advocate is a for-profit company) I still seriously question the appropriateness of the cover. I would have probably felt much more comfortable with the question &#8220;Is Gay the New Black?&#8221; which would have left the statement open, rather than the declaration statement &#8220;Gay is the New Black&#8221; which suggests a closed one. Either way, if it&#8217;s engaging people in conversations about racism and homophobia, the civil rights movement, the gay rights movement, and equality in general, then it would seem to be a win.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laura H.</title>
		<link>http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/gay-is-not-the-new-black/comment-page-1/#comment-3866</link>
		<dc:creator>Laura H.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 21:55:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/?p=1295#comment-3866</guid>
		<description>OK I admit it - I only just now read the Advocate piece. Now I&#039;m wondering if everyone else commenting here did too. There seems to be a lot of anger about the cover, but the article actually says the things many folks here are saying. See my copied excerpt:

&quot;We gave into another post-election temptation too. Many drew a simple parallel between our struggle and the black civil rights movement. Signs at protests said, “I have a dream too,” “Welcome to Selma,” and “Gay is the new black.”

There’s something to this, but it’s dangerous territory, and we have to be careful not to lose our bearings here. Gay is the new black in only one meaningful way. At present we are the most socially acceptable targets for the kind of casual hatred that American society once approved for habitual use against black people. Gay is the dark pit where our society lets people throw their fears about what’s wrong with the world. (Many people, needless to say, still direct this kind of hatred toward black people too. But it’s more commonly OK to caricature and demean us in politics and the media in ways from which blacks are now largely exempt.) The comparison becomes useful, though, in forcing us to consider the differences between our civil rights struggle and theirs.

Except in a few statistically insignificant cases (the gay kid who happens to be the child of gay parents), being gay begins with recognizing your difference from the people with whom you have your earliest, most intimate relationships. As such, it’s an essentially isolating experience and therefore breeds in many gay people certain qualities -- such as independence and perfectionism -- that can undermine our ability to cooperate and compromise with others. Though some of us were lucky enough to find role models, mentors, or gay friends early in life, we weren’t born into the kind of beloved community that the African-American church aspires to be. Today, the church is still the strongest black American institution, and though it is far from a perfect place, for its members it’s a cradle of love and shelter from oppression.

Our oppression, by and large, is nowhere near as extreme as blacks’, and we insult them when we make facile comparisons between our plights. Gay people have more resources than blacks had in the 1960s. We are embedded in the power structures of every institution of this society. While it is illegal in this country to fire an African-American without cause and in most places it’s still legal to fire a gay person for being gay, we are more likely to have informal means of recourse than black people have. Almost all gay people have the choice of passing. Very few black people have that option. Of course, we shouldn’t have to make that choice, and our civil rights struggle is about making sure that we don’t have to.

On a deeper level, though, the gay civil rights struggle is about preventing discrimination based on our proclivity to love, as distinct from the messier foundation of racial discrimination, which primarily has to do with protecting white privilege and wealth. No one would deny that fear of mixed marriages significantly inhibited the progress of the black civil rights movement. (Blacks won employment and voting rights a full three years before the Supreme Court finally struck down miscegenation laws in 1967.) But love and sex were not, as is the case with gay civil rights, unambiguously the heart of the matter. This is the reason our progress has been slow: Love cannot be understood in the abstract. You cannot understand it until it touches you or you find your way into its orbit. &quot; ~excerpt from Advocate article.

Soooo, I think the cover was to get people&#039;s attention (which is what mag covers are supposed to do), but the key is reading the article, which clearly says that the gay/black comparison is not a complete comparison by any means.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>OK I admit it &#8211; I only just now read the Advocate piece. Now I&#8217;m wondering if everyone else commenting here did too. There seems to be a lot of anger about the cover, but the article actually says the things many folks here are saying. See my copied excerpt:</p>
<p>&#8220;We gave into another post-election temptation too. Many drew a simple parallel between our struggle and the black civil rights movement. Signs at protests said, “I have a dream too,” “Welcome to Selma,” and “Gay is the new black.”</p>
<p>There’s something to this, but it’s dangerous territory, and we have to be careful not to lose our bearings here. Gay is the new black in only one meaningful way. At present we are the most socially acceptable targets for the kind of casual hatred that American society once approved for habitual use against black people. Gay is the dark pit where our society lets people throw their fears about what’s wrong with the world. (Many people, needless to say, still direct this kind of hatred toward black people too. But it’s more commonly OK to caricature and demean us in politics and the media in ways from which blacks are now largely exempt.) The comparison becomes useful, though, in forcing us to consider the differences between our civil rights struggle and theirs.</p>
<p>Except in a few statistically insignificant cases (the gay kid who happens to be the child of gay parents), being gay begins with recognizing your difference from the people with whom you have your earliest, most intimate relationships. As such, it’s an essentially isolating experience and therefore breeds in many gay people certain qualities &#8212; such as independence and perfectionism &#8212; that can undermine our ability to cooperate and compromise with others. Though some of us were lucky enough to find role models, mentors, or gay friends early in life, we weren’t born into the kind of beloved community that the African-American church aspires to be. Today, the church is still the strongest black American institution, and though it is far from a perfect place, for its members it’s a cradle of love and shelter from oppression.</p>
<p>Our oppression, by and large, is nowhere near as extreme as blacks’, and we insult them when we make facile comparisons between our plights. Gay people have more resources than blacks had in the 1960s. We are embedded in the power structures of every institution of this society. While it is illegal in this country to fire an African-American without cause and in most places it’s still legal to fire a gay person for being gay, we are more likely to have informal means of recourse than black people have. Almost all gay people have the choice of passing. Very few black people have that option. Of course, we shouldn’t have to make that choice, and our civil rights struggle is about making sure that we don’t have to.</p>
<p>On a deeper level, though, the gay civil rights struggle is about preventing discrimination based on our proclivity to love, as distinct from the messier foundation of racial discrimination, which primarily has to do with protecting white privilege and wealth. No one would deny that fear of mixed marriages significantly inhibited the progress of the black civil rights movement. (Blacks won employment and voting rights a full three years before the Supreme Court finally struck down miscegenation laws in 1967.) But love and sex were not, as is the case with gay civil rights, unambiguously the heart of the matter. This is the reason our progress has been slow: Love cannot be understood in the abstract. You cannot understand it until it touches you or you find your way into its orbit. &#8221; ~excerpt from Advocate article.</p>
<p>Soooo, I think the cover was to get people&#8217;s attention (which is what mag covers are supposed to do), but the key is reading the article, which clearly says that the gay/black comparison is not a complete comparison by any means.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laura H.</title>
		<link>http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/gay-is-not-the-new-black/comment-page-1/#comment-3865</link>
		<dc:creator>Laura H.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 21:35:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/?p=1295#comment-3865</guid>
		<description>Agreed.

The only thing I really still have issues with is that, while I do understand what you wrote about the possible reasons some African Americans are irate at the gay/black comparison, I STILL think it&#039;s really, really different than a gay/alcoholic comparison. One can (initially) choose to drink or not, but all people are born with their own orientation - some het, some gay, some in between. There are those who do maintain that being gay is a choice, but they are clearly ignoring the testimony of many, many folks as well as the latest scientific knowledge. Putting one&#039;s head in the sand is, however, a choice.

I do think we should think very carefully before making any comparison, but oftentimes comparisons are what get people to understand the common thread that runs through all discrimination.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Agreed.</p>
<p>The only thing I really still have issues with is that, while I do understand what you wrote about the possible reasons some African Americans are irate at the gay/black comparison, I STILL think it&#8217;s really, really different than a gay/alcoholic comparison. One can (initially) choose to drink or not, but all people are born with their own orientation &#8211; some het, some gay, some in between. There are those who do maintain that being gay is a choice, but they are clearly ignoring the testimony of many, many folks as well as the latest scientific knowledge. Putting one&#8217;s head in the sand is, however, a choice.</p>
<p>I do think we should think very carefully before making any comparison, but oftentimes comparisons are what get people to understand the common thread that runs through all discrimination.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: anita</title>
		<link>http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/gay-is-not-the-new-black/comment-page-1/#comment-3856</link>
		<dc:creator>anita</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 02:05:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/?p=1295#comment-3856</guid>
		<description>Laura--&gt;You won&#039;t get any arguments from me on what you&#039;re saying. For this very reason, by what Annie&#039;s comparison brought up in a response, I think it&#039;s valuable to see that for a large percentage of African-American people the comparison between being gay and being black is just as appalling to them, particularly among those who hold the belief that homosexuality is a sin or a choice. All the discomfort, irritation and frustration we might feel with the alcoholism/homosexuality comparison is at my best guess similar to the ire they feel in the black/gay comparison. The problem with &lt;strong&gt;any&lt;/strong&gt; comparison between two different things is that at some point every analogy drawn between them breaks down and so we need to weigh the risk against the benefit of using them; whether that be homosexuality/alcoholism, black/gay, &lt;em&gt;ad infinitum&lt;/em&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Laura&#8211;>You won&#8217;t get any arguments from me on what you&#8217;re saying. For this very reason, by what Annie&#8217;s comparison brought up in a response, I think it&#8217;s valuable to see that for a large percentage of African-American people the comparison between being gay and being black is just as appalling to them, particularly among those who hold the belief that homosexuality is a sin or a choice. All the discomfort, irritation and frustration we might feel with the alcoholism/homosexuality comparison is at my best guess similar to the ire they feel in the black/gay comparison. The problem with <strong>any</strong> comparison between two different things is that at some point every analogy drawn between them breaks down and so we need to weigh the risk against the benefit of using them; whether that be homosexuality/alcoholism, black/gay, <em>ad infinitum</em>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laura H.</title>
		<link>http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/gay-is-not-the-new-black/comment-page-1/#comment-3846</link>
		<dc:creator>Laura H.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 17:43:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/?p=1295#comment-3846</guid>
		<description>I understand the attempt at comparison; I just think it&#039;s a dangerous and deceptive comparison.  Boiled down, Alcoholism=damage and Homosexuality=simple innate orientation (which often is manifested as Love). 

Taking the alcoholism approach to comparison, we might say then that an undisclosed murderer would equal a person with a homosexual orientation. Or that a spousal abuser equals a homosexual person. All of these things can be hidden, but they are most certainly not equal. Thus, we could also say that an alcoholic = heterosexual. One can certainly choose to hide any orientation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I understand the attempt at comparison; I just think it&#8217;s a dangerous and deceptive comparison.  Boiled down, Alcoholism=damage and Homosexuality=simple innate orientation (which often is manifested as Love). </p>
<p>Taking the alcoholism approach to comparison, we might say then that an undisclosed murderer would equal a person with a homosexual orientation. Or that a spousal abuser equals a homosexual person. All of these things can be hidden, but they are most certainly not equal. Thus, we could also say that an alcoholic = heterosexual. One can certainly choose to hide any orientation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: anita</title>
		<link>http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/gay-is-not-the-new-black/comment-page-1/#comment-3845</link>
		<dc:creator>anita</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:59:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/?p=1295#comment-3845</guid>
		<description>Laura ---&gt; I think Annie&#039;s comparison of alcoholism to homosexuality drives home the point about the dangers of comparing being gay to being black. Both have similarities and yet are very different, so we run the risk in comparing that there will be confusion in what we&#039;re implying. Annie&#039;s primary point as I understood it was that being an alcoholic and being gay are both things that can conceivably be hidden. I agree with that, just as equally as I would agree that people that fall under either category are stigmatized in our society. On the other hand, we&#039;re all very aware that some who oppose homosexuality argue that both alcoholism and homosexuality are a disease/addiction. Like you, I obviously don&#039;t agree with that and that might be why any comparison between the two causes discomfort. 

I couldn&#039;t agree with you more as to there being similar struggles faced in the civil rights movement and in the gay rights movement. Discrimination is discrimination though it comes in varying degrees. And all the rest you said, you said so well!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Laura &#8212;> I think Annie&#8217;s comparison of alcoholism to homosexuality drives home the point about the dangers of comparing being gay to being black. Both have similarities and yet are very different, so we run the risk in comparing that there will be confusion in what we&#8217;re implying. Annie&#8217;s primary point as I understood it was that being an alcoholic and being gay are both things that can conceivably be hidden. I agree with that, just as equally as I would agree that people that fall under either category are stigmatized in our society. On the other hand, we&#8217;re all very aware that some who oppose homosexuality argue that both alcoholism and homosexuality are a disease/addiction. Like you, I obviously don&#8217;t agree with that and that might be why any comparison between the two causes discomfort. </p>
<p>I couldn&#8217;t agree with you more as to there being similar struggles faced in the civil rights movement and in the gay rights movement. Discrimination is discrimination though it comes in varying degrees. And all the rest you said, you said so well!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laura H.</title>
		<link>http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/gay-is-not-the-new-black/comment-page-1/#comment-3844</link>
		<dc:creator>Laura H.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2008 14:28:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sisterfriends-together.org/?p=1295#comment-3844</guid>
		<description>I feel incredibly uncomfortable when I read Annie&#039;s comment, as it seems she&#039;s almost equating alcoholism with being lesbian/gay. I understand she may be trying to make the comparison of something that can be hidden from something outwardly physical (skin color or sometimes gender), but I think it&#039;s a potentially damaging comparison. One could certainly point out that no one is born an alcoholic, but as more and more people testify, and as more and more science shows, those of us with a gay/lesbian orientation ARE born (read:created) that way.

While I do agree at a basic level that &quot;gay is not the new black&quot; I do think many of the struggles we face are similar (surely not all, but many), and that this may be a great time to revisit the idea that &quot;faith is the evidence of things unseen&quot; and realize that just because we gay people can hide doesn&#039;t mean we should. Hiding is denying who God created us to be, and while I know that sometimes hiding means physical survival, those of us who are able to come out and speak the Truth have a responsibility to do just that. We are all human - inside and out - and simply because others can&#039;t &quot;see&quot; the inside where our orientations etc. reside, doesn&#039;t make it okay to discriminate against us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I feel incredibly uncomfortable when I read Annie&#8217;s comment, as it seems she&#8217;s almost equating alcoholism with being lesbian/gay. I understand she may be trying to make the comparison of something that can be hidden from something outwardly physical (skin color or sometimes gender), but I think it&#8217;s a potentially damaging comparison. One could certainly point out that no one is born an alcoholic, but as more and more people testify, and as more and more science shows, those of us with a gay/lesbian orientation ARE born (read:created) that way.</p>
<p>While I do agree at a basic level that &#8220;gay is not the new black&#8221; I do think many of the struggles we face are similar (surely not all, but many), and that this may be a great time to revisit the idea that &#8220;faith is the evidence of things unseen&#8221; and realize that just because we gay people can hide doesn&#8217;t mean we should. Hiding is denying who God created us to be, and while I know that sometimes hiding means physical survival, those of us who are able to come out and speak the Truth have a responsibility to do just that. We are all human &#8211; inside and out &#8211; and simply because others can&#8217;t &#8220;see&#8221; the inside where our orientations etc. reside, doesn&#8217;t make it okay to discriminate against us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

